Representativeness of our sample.

The proliferation of country and state-level net zero-emission commitments, rising energy costs, and the quest for energy security in the wake of the Ukraine crisis have renewed the debate about the future of energy sources. As opposed to elite discourse, the energy policy preferences of the public remain less explored. While many public opinion surveys report preferences for a specific type of clean energy, there is less work on understanding choices among different types. We explore whether support for nuclear over wind energy at the state level depends on how people assess the impact of these energy sources on health, local jobs, landscape disruption, and the stability of the electricity supply. Importantly, we seek to understand where people physically reside (and their experience of existing energy possibilities) might influence their energy policy preferences. We estimate multiple regression models with OLS with our original survey data of a representative sample of Washington residents (n = 844). We find that the physical proximity to existing energy facilities does not influence support for nuclear over wind energy. However, this support is shaped by the importance respondents attach to health (-), jobs (-), landscapes (+), and supply stability (+) dimensions of energy source. Moreover, the physical proximity to existing energy facilities moderates the importance respondents attach to these dimensions.

随着各国及各州净零排放承诺的日益增多、能源成本持续上涨，以及乌克兰危机爆发后各国对能源安全的迫切诉求，有关能源未来的讨论再度升温。与精英阶层的政策话语不同，公众的能源政策偏好迄今仍较少得到深入探讨。尽管诸多民调已关注到公众对特定清洁能源类型的偏好，但针对不同清洁能源类型间选择偏好的研究仍相对匮乏。本研究旨在探讨：在州级层面，公众对核电相较于风电的支持度，是否取决于其对两类能源在健康、本地就业、景观破坏以及电力供应稳定性方面影响的评估。尤为重要的是，本研究旨在厘清公众的实际居住区位（及其对现有能源供应格局的体验）是否会影响其能源政策偏好。我们基于针对华盛顿州居民的代表性抽样原始调查数据（样本量n=844），构建了普通最小二乘法（Ordinary Least Squares, OLS）多元回归模型。研究结果显示，公众与现有能源设施的物理距离，并不会显著影响其对核电相较于风电的支持度。不过，该支持度会受到受访者对能源各维度重要性认知的塑造：健康维度（负向影响）、就业维度（负向影响）、景观维度（正向影响）以及供应稳定性维度（正向影响）。此外，公众与现有能源设施的物理距离，会对受访者在上述各维度的重要性认知产生调节效应。